Search a substantial collection of case-specific reasoning, then narrow it by petition, field, legal issue, or date.
This expanded collection favors source-backed access over perfect automated classification. Fields, labels, summaries, and relevance may contain errors; records marked ‘broader context’ need extra care. Review the cited source before relying on any record. These appeals and motions do not show approval odds or denial rates, and are not legal advice or a prediction.
10,847 decisions /36,849 findings
Showing 101–110
NIWNIW · National importanceReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Environment / Energy6 citations
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
What the decision said
AAO explicitly reserved the first prong as unnecessary to the ultimate decision because the second prong was dispositive.
Why this is useful
Compare how the decision separates a broadly important field from the prospective impact of the applicant’s specific work.
View full reasoning +
AAO explicitly reserved the first prong as unnecessary to the ultimate decision because the second prong was dispositive.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-24_05_B5203; source_row=45163 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
What the decision said
The Petitioner did not meaningfully contest SCOPS' finding on appeal, repeating only the same arguments and documents without identifying how SCOPS erred. The issue is therefore waived.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner did not meaningfully contest SCOPS' finding on appeal, repeating only the same arguments and documents without identifying how SCOPS erred. The issue is therefore waived.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-24_01_B2203; source_row=45130 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot pursuedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the petitioner
What the decision said
The Petitioner did not assert this criterion in the record below and did not provide the promised evidence on appeal, so eligibility under this criterion is waived.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner did not assert this criterion in the record below and did not provide the promised evidence on appeal, so eligibility under this criterion is waived.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-24_01_B2203; source_row=45131 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
NIWNIW · National importanceNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
NIW · National importance
substantial merit and national importance
Why AAO was not persuaded
AAO found that the evidence relied on the general importance of small business and Latino entrepreneurship rather than showing how the Petitioner's specific company would have national-level impact, and that revenue/wage projections were unsupported by methodology or independent evidence.…
Why this is useful
Compare how the decision separates a broadly important field from the prospective impact of the applicant’s specific work.
View full reasoning +
AAO found that the evidence relied on the general importance of small business and Latino entrepreneurship rather than showing how the Petitioner's specific company would have national-level impact, and that revenue/wage projections were unsupported by methodology or independent evidence. Support letters used vague, generalized language and the business plan failed to specify methodologies or tools or to demonstrate substantial positive economic effects.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-24_02_B5203; source_row=45154 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material in professional or major trade publications or other major media
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Petitioner failed to submit objective evidence of the publications' relative circulation, readership, or viewership despite an RFE requesting it. The claimed documentary proof referenced on appeal was not in the record.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Petitioner failed to submit objective evidence of the publications' relative circulation, readership, or viewership despite an RFE requesting it. The claimed documentary proof referenced on appeal was not in the record.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2026-03-23_01_B2203; source_row=45120 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c